Musk reportedly pressed Wall Street to buy Grok subscriptions ahead of SpaceX IPO

Allegation and scale

It has been reported that Elon Musk pressed the banks, law firms and auditors working on SpaceX’s planned IPO to purchase subscriptions to Grok, the AI chatbot from his xAI unit, according to the New York Times and cited by Phoenix Tech (ifeng). The claim comes from four people familiar with the matter. Reportedly, three banks agreed to spend “tens of millions” on Grok and began integrating the tool into their IT systems. Why would Musk ask advisers to buy a product tied to his companies? Because this IPO is enormous — and influence matters.

What’s at stake

SpaceX’s offering is expected to be one of the biggest IPOs ever: fundraising of more than $50 billion and a valuation north of $1 trillion have been reported, which implies underwriting fees potentially exceeding $500 million. Five banks are expected to lead the deal: Bank of America, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase and Morgan Stanley. In such a high-stakes environment, bankers traditionally bend over backwards to placate issuers. But asking them to buy the issuer’s product blurs lines. It has also been reported that Musk asked banks to buy advertising on his social platform X, though reports are less definitive on that point.

Governance and regulatory context

This episode underscores two broader themes for Western readers: the outsized leverage charismatic founders can exert over advisers, and the compliance questions that follow when commercial favors and underwriting fees intersect. Could requests for product purchases invite scrutiny from regulators or spark internal compliance reviews at firms that handle public offerings? Possibly. It has been reported that the banks were motivated in part by the prospect of huge fees; whether that commercial calculus crosses ethical or legal lines remains an open question.

What it signals

Whatever investigators ultimately find, the story is a reminder of how power and access shape modern capital markets. Is this aggressive deal-making or an inappropriate use of leverage by a CEO with extraordinary clout? For now, the claims rest on anonymous sources and media reports. But one fact is clear: in an era hungry for blockbuster listings, few companies — or leaders — command the kind of deference Musk reportedly received.